|
|
|
 |
|
|
Dutch Parliament ratifies Franco-Dutch Treaty
by The Daily Herald
Posted: Oct 20, 2006 15:37 UTC
|
- It’s an act of complete disrespect, says Arrindell ~
WILLEMSTAD - More than twelve years after it was signed in Paris, the Franco-Dutch Treaty between the Dutch Kingdom and France has been ratified by the Dutch Parliament.
The treaty, which sets out to regulate the entry of foreigners at the airport in St. Maarten, was approved by the Dutch Second Chamber in September and by the First Chamber on Wednesday.
There was no official comment on the ratification of the treaty from the Island Government on Thursday, but this latest development drew a sharp reaction from leader of the People’s Progressive Alliance (PPA) Gracita Arrindell, who said the Dutch Parliament’s ratification of the treaty “should be considered an act of complete disrespect for and purposeful humiliation of the people of St. Maarten.” (See related story).
Constitutional and Home Affairs Minister Roland Duncan told The Daily Herald Thursday he had no information about the decision taken, but said he had expected that the treaty would be passed.
“France has been putting pressure to pass the treaty while the Netherlands Antilles has been vague in its position on the treaty,” Duncan said.
He noted that the Council of State had advised the Dutch Government earlier this year to ratify the treaty regardless of whatever objections there might be. “Also in the Council of State’s advice about the three smaller islands, the Dutch Government was reminded that the treaty had to be ratified,” Duncan said.
Dutch Foreign Affairs Minister Ben Bot had asked the Dutch First and Second Chambers to ratify as soon as possible the Franco-Dutch Treaty signed May 17, 1994, by then vice prime minister Leo Chance. Bot made his request after consulting with Prime Minister Emily de Jongh-Elhage, who indicated that the matter should be handled diligently.
Bot had said that as soon as the treaty was ratified by both Dutch Chambers he would start negotiations with the Netherlands Antilles and France to take measures to prevent foreigners from entering St. Maarten illegally through the harbour and beaches.
France ratified the treaty on September 22, 1995, but the Dutch Government had been waiting on St. Maarten for its final position on the treaty to send it to Parliament.
Bot said in a statement issued on June 16 that that situation was no longer acceptable. He noted that illegal immigrants in St. Maarten had multiplied during the last 10 years and that while estimates of the number of illegal persons residing in St. Maarten varied, according to the Dutch Parliament’s Permanent Committee on Defence that visited the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba in January, it was believed that that almost 30,000 people were residing in St. Maarten illegally.
According to the Bot, effective control of foreigners has become more important in light of the combating of international terrorism.
“The pressure from the French to do something has increased over the last years. My predecessor and I have brought this matter to the attention of the Government in Willemstad (Central Government, ed.) many times. However, it never led to a conclusion,” he said.
Bot said the treaty had not been ratified because of an advice from the Netherlands Antilles Parliament that contended that the treaty would have negative effects on St. Maarten’s tourist industry and because there had been objections about the authority of the committee that would be installed to decide on the controls to be carried out.
This committee comprising five people from the French side and five from St. Maarten would decide what incoming flights should be considered as risk flights so the passengers would be submitted to controls by Dutch and French immigration officers.
It was decided in 1999 to hold up the process to ratify the treaty because the Dutch Government wanted a reaction from the Netherlands Antilles.
However, Bot said, there still had been no word from the Netherlands Antilles on St. Maarten’s position on the treaty, while other forms of desired cooperation with the French authorities such as Coast Guard and Customs had been on hold because the treaty hadn’t been ratified.
In addition, Bot said the circumstances had changed since St. Maarten posted its objections to the treaty and in the meantime the Netherlands Antilles had adopted as of January 1, 2005, the list with nationalities that are required to have visas when travelling to the Schengen area of which the Dutch Kingdom and France are part.
For the Netherlands Antilles an exception has been made for 13 Caribbean countries. Citizens of these countries do not require visas for the Netherlands Antilles. The Dutch Foreign Affairs Ministry asked French authorities if they could make an exception of these same countries for French St. Martin. The French authorities agreed to nine of the 13 countries, indicating that they would still require people from Suriname, Dominica, Guyana and Jamaica to have visas.
This is according to what St. Maarten wanted, Bot said because St. Maarten had asked in 1994 for Jamaica and Guyana to be included on the list of nationalities required to have visas.
An attempt by former prime minister Etienne Ys to mediate in the impasse had also failed.
“Political leaders of the island, such as leader of the biggest political party Sarah Wescot-Williams, said via the press that Ys should not interfere with the relationship (between) the Netherlands Antilles and the French side of the island and that there were more important issues to attend to than the treaty with France, such as the pensions of politicians and obtaining autonomous status,” Bot wrote to the Second Chamber.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Content © The Daily Herald 2006 - All Rights Reserved.
You may bookmark this web page, print it or e-mail it to
a friend in accordance with the fair-use provisions of
copyright laws. The material is intended solely for the use
of the individual user.
Archiving, redistribution, or republication of this
material
on other terms, in any medium, requires the express
written permission of the author or publication and the
notification of the editors of Caribseek News. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
